AT ANT and the relevance of the University
For hopefully obvious reasons I could not stop thinking about my teaching practices and pedagogy while reading "Worlds Apart," by Patrick Dias, Aviva Freedman, Peter Medway, and Anthony Pare. My contemplation only deepened while revisiting Clay Spinuzzi's Network: Theorizing Knowledge Work in Telecommunications. I found it remarkably interesting to read these two pieces in tandem and through the lens of technical communication.
As what seems to be standard practice here at SU, I structure my classes around a theme of my own choice and then create writing tasks that allow me to teach students how to approach said task. However, while reading both pieces I couldn’t help but wonder if I would be more effective in the classroom by teaching genre theory, rhetoric, and composition studies. In other words, instead of developing a class around a theme that is not only interesting to me but also “hopefully” interesting to the students then providing opportunities for students to “practice” important rhetorical strategies, I am considering focusing on “writing” itself.
Although the authors of “Worlds Apart” focus on courses and workplaces that are not typically considered writing centered I felt it was very insightful. According to the authors, "As studies of nonacademic writing proliferate, it is possible to see the extent to which writers rely on situation-specific knowledge in the preparation of texts. This "local knowledge" (Geertz, 1983) concerns all aspects of the writing situation, from disciplinary and institutional regulations governing the form and substance of texts to relationships among writers and readers. Such a view of writing has been confirmed in the growing consideration of genre theory in theorizing about writing (Bazerman, 1988; Bazerman & ParadiS, 1991b;Berkenkotter & Huckin, 1995; Cope & Kalantzis, 1993; Freedman & Medway, 1994a, 1994b: Swales, 1990)" (qtd in “Worlds Apart”).
After reading the excerpt above I was reminded of how often we talk about genre in class but how rarely we focus on the importance of such knowledge. Spinuzzi echoes this concern with genre when he explains, "Genres—which can be glossed as typified rhetorical responses to recurring social situations (Miller, 1984)—do much of the enacting that holds a network together. They do this work not by virtue of being simply text types or forms but because they are tools-in-use. That is, in this analysis, I stress genre as a behavioral descriptor rather than as a formal one (cf. Spinuzzi, 2003b; Voloshinov, 1973)" (qtd in Network).
In fact both the theories Spinuzzi invokes (activity theory and actor-network theory) are greatly contingent on genre. Because “Worlds Apart,” articulates the importance of understanding how to negotiate writing tasks within the workplace and Spinuzzi illustrates the significance of genre for networks to be effective, it seems imperative that genre be central to writing instruction.
To be clear I do not posit composition as a “service industry” but rather as a discipline that is deeply concerned with making transparent what is often opaque.
Sunday, February 7, 2010
Sunday, January 24, 2010
A Dream of Access: Not the Tech Comm History I Was Expecting
A Dream of Access: Not the Tech Comm History I Was Expecting
When I imagined the history of computer development I always pictured a multitude of governmental -war games-loving men in a white walled, dust free, fluorescent lighted, room conspiring to make the world's most "powerful" and dominating machine. I suppose that image was implanted from several films and growing up in a time that featured "powerful" and often mischievous computers.
Unlike my made up history I was pleasantly surprised to find that most computer developers hoped to use the technology for good. Both Wells and Licklider/Taylor wrote directly about the potential benefits to all humankind that computers or access to a central "bank" of information/knowledge could have. When detailing the possibilities created by open access to "knowledge" Wells states, "And its creation is a way to world peace that can be followed without any very grave risk of collision with the warring political forces and the vested institutional interests of today. Quietly and sanely this new encyclopedia, will not so much overcome these archaic discords, as deprive them, steadily but imperceptibly of their present reality" (88). Although I believe this statement to be naive the emphasis on open access and world peace is interesting. It also seems to be in stark contrast to the road tech comm eventually went down (the objective-unemotional-positivist approach).
In addition to Wells, Licklider's text also seems to focus on the positive possibilites afforded by technology. In other words, the attention was definitely on the benefits of new technology that could allow for direct interfacing,"modeling," and collaboration. The possibilty for collaboration is what appeared to be the most effective development in technology. Again ,I find this in contrast to the critiques we read for last weeks class. Although I understand that tech comm's desire for "objectivity" is primarily due to its attachement to science and the need to merely "transmit the facts," however, I imagined a somewhat maniacle figure behind the development of the inital technology. Licklider and Taylor's essay (perhaps idealistic) did make an interesting case for the important role of messaging software and the role of modeling. The authors state, "And through them, all the members of the supercommunity can communicate-with other people, with programs, with data, or with selected combinations of those resources. The message processors, being all alike, introduce an element of uniformity into an otherwise grossly nonuniform situation, for they facilitate both hardware and software compatibility among diverse and poorly compatible computers" (32). The opportunity to connect "communities" offered by technology actually points to a more harmonious existence than that without computers.
What was most striking about these two articles was the sense of "hope" offered by technological advances. I wonder if many of still feel this way or if we are more perplexed and feel more akin to Sullivan (from last week).
When I imagined the history of computer development I always pictured a multitude of governmental -war games-loving men in a white walled, dust free, fluorescent lighted, room conspiring to make the world's most "powerful" and dominating machine. I suppose that image was implanted from several films and growing up in a time that featured "powerful" and often mischievous computers.
Unlike my made up history I was pleasantly surprised to find that most computer developers hoped to use the technology for good. Both Wells and Licklider/Taylor wrote directly about the potential benefits to all humankind that computers or access to a central "bank" of information/knowledge could have. When detailing the possibilities created by open access to "knowledge" Wells states, "And its creation is a way to world peace that can be followed without any very grave risk of collision with the warring political forces and the vested institutional interests of today. Quietly and sanely this new encyclopedia, will not so much overcome these archaic discords, as deprive them, steadily but imperceptibly of their present reality" (88). Although I believe this statement to be naive the emphasis on open access and world peace is interesting. It also seems to be in stark contrast to the road tech comm eventually went down (the objective-unemotional-positivist approach).
In addition to Wells, Licklider's text also seems to focus on the positive possibilites afforded by technology. In other words, the attention was definitely on the benefits of new technology that could allow for direct interfacing,"modeling," and collaboration. The possibilty for collaboration is what appeared to be the most effective development in technology. Again ,I find this in contrast to the critiques we read for last weeks class. Although I understand that tech comm's desire for "objectivity" is primarily due to its attachement to science and the need to merely "transmit the facts," however, I imagined a somewhat maniacle figure behind the development of the inital technology. Licklider and Taylor's essay (perhaps idealistic) did make an interesting case for the important role of messaging software and the role of modeling. The authors state, "And through them, all the members of the supercommunity can communicate-with other people, with programs, with data, or with selected combinations of those resources. The message processors, being all alike, introduce an element of uniformity into an otherwise grossly nonuniform situation, for they facilitate both hardware and software compatibility among diverse and poorly compatible computers" (32). The opportunity to connect "communities" offered by technology actually points to a more harmonious existence than that without computers.
What was most striking about these two articles was the sense of "hope" offered by technological advances. I wonder if many of still feel this way or if we are more perplexed and feel more akin to Sullivan (from last week).
Monday, January 18, 2010
Notes for History, Rhetroic and Humanism
CCR 760
Rutter, Russel. "History, Rhetroic and Humanism." Central Works in Technical Communication.
Rutter calls for more inclusion of imagination and liberal arts education in technical writing. He argues that technical writing has gotten too pragmatic and generally ignores the rhetorical nature of any communication. He opens with a powerful example from the the space shuttle Challenger disaster.
Quotable quotes:
It is intellectually simple, though astronomically dull, to regard writing merely as a matter of polish, but worse yet, it leads to a trap. Colleges and universities turn out graduates who discover by experience that recipes for writing that their college instructors once adopted in response to sudden demands for technical writing courses do not satisfy the needs of science and industry as they are now constituted. (28)
Technical communicators, because they depend on both "knowledge and practice," because they rely on learning as a guide to experience, and because they need to bring elogquence, empathy, and imagination to the world of work are--should be expected to be--rhetoricians. (29)
General comments:
As this is new terriory for me it's difficult to consider this essay critically. So far I buy it. I think all communication typically needs to be considered rhetorically. I also like how he points to the importance of theorry. He approaches theory in terms of its importance to the "applied" science in order to strengthen the argument for more attention to the liberal arts in science and technology education. I also like to see this in writing classes. In other words students need not only immulate models of how to write but also be introduced to theory of communication practices so that students can be the problem solvers. I see this analogous with the saying that goes something like "it's better to teach a man to fish than to give him a fish...."
Rutter, Russel. "History, Rhetroic and Humanism." Central Works in Technical Communication.
Rutter calls for more inclusion of imagination and liberal arts education in technical writing. He argues that technical writing has gotten too pragmatic and generally ignores the rhetorical nature of any communication. He opens with a powerful example from the the space shuttle Challenger disaster.
Quotable quotes:
It is intellectually simple, though astronomically dull, to regard writing merely as a matter of polish, but worse yet, it leads to a trap. Colleges and universities turn out graduates who discover by experience that recipes for writing that their college instructors once adopted in response to sudden demands for technical writing courses do not satisfy the needs of science and industry as they are now constituted. (28)
Technical communicators, because they depend on both "knowledge and practice," because they rely on learning as a guide to experience, and because they need to bring elogquence, empathy, and imagination to the world of work are--should be expected to be--rhetoricians. (29)
General comments:
As this is new terriory for me it's difficult to consider this essay critically. So far I buy it. I think all communication typically needs to be considered rhetorically. I also like how he points to the importance of theorry. He approaches theory in terms of its importance to the "applied" science in order to strengthen the argument for more attention to the liberal arts in science and technology education. I also like to see this in writing classes. In other words students need not only immulate models of how to write but also be introduced to theory of communication practices so that students can be the problem solvers. I see this analogous with the saying that goes something like "it's better to teach a man to fish than to give him a fish...."
Thursday, November 19, 2009
CCR 691 Project Proposal
Nicole C. Howell
Eileen Schell
October 12, 2009
CCR 691 Project Proposal Final Draft
Overview:
· Scope- In this project I intend to take a general survey of current work by and about Latinos in the field of Composition/rhetoric. I will begin with a brief general history and then transition to the current environment. Although I will begin with a broad survey of work I do intend on focusing on Chicana scholars and specifically their current representation in our field. Inevitably I would like this work to investigate why there is a large discrepancy between the number of Chicanas entering the Academy and those largely informing the field of Composition rhetoric.
· Parameters- I will focus my research by including only the most prevalent voices in Latino rhetoric, those that informed them, and those concerned with Latino rhetoric. I will also map the framing subjects of their research. In other words I will look at the fields most heralded theorists and then determine what and who they study (ex. classroom practices, communities, high theory, literature, published texts, cultural artifacts, etc).
· Key Questions-
o How have Latino/as (in general) been represented in the field of Composition/rhetoric?
o How has the research conducted so far represented Latino/a’s as a whole and/or to what cause?
o Where do Latino/a’s figure into the field of Composition/rhetoric?
o What kinds of issues/challenges arise from the several cultures represented by “Latino?”
o How are Chicanas (specifically) represented in the field?
Rationale:
· Importance- I find this work important for several reasons. First I am a Mexican-American female entering into the field and I do not “see” very many scholars that “look” like me. In other words, although “Hispanics” account for over 25% of the U.S. population the percentage of Hispanics that hold graduate degrees is much smaller. Second, because Composition is a required course at most universities our teachers are quite visible to the general student body. This point is particularly important as the university setting becomes more diverse and our teachers do not accurately “represent” that diversity. Third, because literacy narratives vary by culture and experience it is imperative to consider what kind of narratives are informing our field and if they remain exclusionary. Lastly, and perhaps most importantly, this work has not been done before.
· Contribution- This research “of research” will help situate the current state of Latino scholars in the field of Composition rhetoric. As I compile information about the fractured state of Latino scholarship (fractured primarily because of the variation within the description of “Latino”) I hope to draw some conclusions about how to make our field inviting to the Chicana population. In other words, this work will help form a foundation for a call to action.
· Further plans- In addition to this project I intend at looking at the qualities of academic authorship and how it relates to the Chicana population. I see this initial mapping as a starting point for my authorship inquiry which will be explored for CCR 720. In addition, I will further situate and uncover the theories and scholars informing current Latino rhetors by creating a “genealogy” map of citations for CCR 601. Although I am only in my first year of the PhD program I anticipate this line of inquiry as one of my exam areas and therefore hope to gather as much information as possible.
Bibliography
Baca, Damian. Mestiz@ Scripts, Digital Migrations and the Territories of Writing. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2008. Print.
Cintron, Ralph. Angels’ Town: Chero Ways, Gang Life and Rhetorics of the Everyday. Boston: Beacon, 1997. Print.
Dicochea, Perlita R. “Chicana Critical Rhetoric: Recrafting La Causa in Chicana Movement Discourse,…” Frontiers 25.1 (2004): 77-92. Print.
Enoch, Jessica. “Survival Stories: Historiographic Approaches to Chicana Rhetorics of Sterilization Abuse.” Rhetoric Society Quarterly 35.3 (2005): 1-30. Print.
_____.“’Para la Mujer’: Defining a Chicana Feminist Rhetoric at the Turn of the Century.” College English 67.1 ( 2004): 20-37. Print.
Flores, Lisa. “Creating Discursive Space Through A Rhetoric of Difference: Chicana Feminists Craft A Homeland.” Quaraterly Journal of Speech 82 (1996): 142-156. Print.
Galindo, Rene. “Voices of Identity in a Chicana Teacher’s Occupational Narratives of the Self.” The Urban Review 39.3 (2007): 251-280. Print.
Latino/a Discourses . Ed. Hall Kells, Michelle, Valerie Balester and Victor Villanueva. Portsmouth: Boyton/Cook, 2004. Print.
Lunsford, Andrea. “Toward a Mestiza Rhetoric: Gloria Anzaludua on Composition and Postcoloniality.” Journal of Advanced Composition 18.1 (1998): 1-27. Print
Orosco, Jose-Antonio. “Neighborhood Democracy and Chicana/o Cultural Citzenship in Armando Rendon’s Chicano Manifesto.” Ethics, Place & Environment 10.2 (121-139): Print.
Rivera, John-Michael. The Emergence of Mexican America: Recovering Stories of Mexican Peoplehood in U.S. Culture. New York: New York University Press, 2006. Print.
Teaching Writing with Latino/a Students. Ed. Kirklighter, Cristina, Diana Cardenas, and Susan Wolff Murphy. Albany: State University of New York Press, 2007. Print.
Torres, Edén E. Chicana Without Apology = Chicana Sin Vergüenza : The New Chicana Cultural Studies. New York : Routledge, 2003. Print.
Villanueva, Victor. Bootstraps: From an American Academic of Color. Urbana: NCTE, 1993. Print.
_____.“On the Rhetoric and Precedents of Racism. "College Composition and Communication 50.4 (1994): 645-661. Print.
_____.“’Memoria’ Is a Friend of Ours: On the Discourse of Color.’” College English 67.1 (2004): 9-19. Print.
Eileen Schell
October 12, 2009
CCR 691 Project Proposal Final Draft
Overview:
· Scope- In this project I intend to take a general survey of current work by and about Latinos in the field of Composition/rhetoric. I will begin with a brief general history and then transition to the current environment. Although I will begin with a broad survey of work I do intend on focusing on Chicana scholars and specifically their current representation in our field. Inevitably I would like this work to investigate why there is a large discrepancy between the number of Chicanas entering the Academy and those largely informing the field of Composition rhetoric.
· Parameters- I will focus my research by including only the most prevalent voices in Latino rhetoric, those that informed them, and those concerned with Latino rhetoric. I will also map the framing subjects of their research. In other words I will look at the fields most heralded theorists and then determine what and who they study (ex. classroom practices, communities, high theory, literature, published texts, cultural artifacts, etc).
· Key Questions-
o How have Latino/as (in general) been represented in the field of Composition/rhetoric?
o How has the research conducted so far represented Latino/a’s as a whole and/or to what cause?
o Where do Latino/a’s figure into the field of Composition/rhetoric?
o What kinds of issues/challenges arise from the several cultures represented by “Latino?”
o How are Chicanas (specifically) represented in the field?
Rationale:
· Importance- I find this work important for several reasons. First I am a Mexican-American female entering into the field and I do not “see” very many scholars that “look” like me. In other words, although “Hispanics” account for over 25% of the U.S. population the percentage of Hispanics that hold graduate degrees is much smaller. Second, because Composition is a required course at most universities our teachers are quite visible to the general student body. This point is particularly important as the university setting becomes more diverse and our teachers do not accurately “represent” that diversity. Third, because literacy narratives vary by culture and experience it is imperative to consider what kind of narratives are informing our field and if they remain exclusionary. Lastly, and perhaps most importantly, this work has not been done before.
· Contribution- This research “of research” will help situate the current state of Latino scholars in the field of Composition rhetoric. As I compile information about the fractured state of Latino scholarship (fractured primarily because of the variation within the description of “Latino”) I hope to draw some conclusions about how to make our field inviting to the Chicana population. In other words, this work will help form a foundation for a call to action.
· Further plans- In addition to this project I intend at looking at the qualities of academic authorship and how it relates to the Chicana population. I see this initial mapping as a starting point for my authorship inquiry which will be explored for CCR 720. In addition, I will further situate and uncover the theories and scholars informing current Latino rhetors by creating a “genealogy” map of citations for CCR 601. Although I am only in my first year of the PhD program I anticipate this line of inquiry as one of my exam areas and therefore hope to gather as much information as possible.
Bibliography
Baca, Damian. Mestiz@ Scripts, Digital Migrations and the Territories of Writing. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2008. Print.
Cintron, Ralph. Angels’ Town: Chero Ways, Gang Life and Rhetorics of the Everyday. Boston: Beacon, 1997. Print.
Dicochea, Perlita R. “Chicana Critical Rhetoric: Recrafting La Causa in Chicana Movement Discourse,…” Frontiers 25.1 (2004): 77-92. Print.
Enoch, Jessica. “Survival Stories: Historiographic Approaches to Chicana Rhetorics of Sterilization Abuse.” Rhetoric Society Quarterly 35.3 (2005): 1-30. Print.
_____.“’Para la Mujer’: Defining a Chicana Feminist Rhetoric at the Turn of the Century.” College English 67.1 ( 2004): 20-37. Print.
Flores, Lisa. “Creating Discursive Space Through A Rhetoric of Difference: Chicana Feminists Craft A Homeland.” Quaraterly Journal of Speech 82 (1996): 142-156. Print.
Galindo, Rene. “Voices of Identity in a Chicana Teacher’s Occupational Narratives of the Self.” The Urban Review 39.3 (2007): 251-280. Print.
Latino/a Discourses . Ed. Hall Kells, Michelle, Valerie Balester and Victor Villanueva. Portsmouth: Boyton/Cook, 2004. Print.
Lunsford, Andrea. “Toward a Mestiza Rhetoric: Gloria Anzaludua on Composition and Postcoloniality.” Journal of Advanced Composition 18.1 (1998): 1-27. Print
Orosco, Jose-Antonio. “Neighborhood Democracy and Chicana/o Cultural Citzenship in Armando Rendon’s Chicano Manifesto.” Ethics, Place & Environment 10.2 (121-139): Print.
Rivera, John-Michael. The Emergence of Mexican America: Recovering Stories of Mexican Peoplehood in U.S. Culture. New York: New York University Press, 2006. Print.
Teaching Writing with Latino/a Students. Ed. Kirklighter, Cristina, Diana Cardenas, and Susan Wolff Murphy. Albany: State University of New York Press, 2007. Print.
Torres, Edén E. Chicana Without Apology = Chicana Sin Vergüenza : The New Chicana Cultural Studies. New York : Routledge, 2003. Print.
Villanueva, Victor. Bootstraps: From an American Academic of Color. Urbana: NCTE, 1993. Print.
_____.“On the Rhetoric and Precedents of Racism. "College Composition and Communication 50.4 (1994): 645-661. Print.
_____.“’Memoria’ Is a Friend of Ours: On the Discourse of Color.’” College English 67.1 (2004): 9-19. Print.
Spinuzzi The Conclusion...or is it?
Spinuzzi's conclusion to Network, is a strategic summary of his book. He not only returns to the keyterms and concepts iterated in his book but also provides evidence from his case studies to support his call to action. His call to action is what I find most relevant. In the last lines of his book he states, "Only by taking a strategic stance will we be able to identify objectives, set goals, take action, and retain the dynamism and flexibility necessary to cope with net work--whether we're workers, managers, researchers, or theorists. Others can bite ankles; let's concentrate on strengthening hands, making right and left equally dextrous, and teaching them the cunning they need for performing net work" (207). I am compelled to "sign-up" and consider how this will inform my work and my methods.
However, in light of yesterdays colloquium and the call from Margaret to consider the classroom I couldn't help myself from considering how ANT/AT could inform classroom practices. When I think of adopting or adapting ANT/AT I think about methods as they relate to teaching more so than research (although I see a great deal of overlap). How could I provide space for students to---as Spinuzzi states in regards to study participants--"consitute their work, what's a tool, and what is an action?" I feel there is something valuable to bringing students into the negotiation but how that can happen is something I'll have to continue to consider.
However, in light of yesterdays colloquium and the call from Margaret to consider the classroom I couldn't help myself from considering how ANT/AT could inform classroom practices. When I think of adopting or adapting ANT/AT I think about methods as they relate to teaching more so than research (although I see a great deal of overlap). How could I provide space for students to---as Spinuzzi states in regards to study participants--"consitute their work, what's a tool, and what is an action?" I feel there is something valuable to bringing students into the negotiation but how that can happen is something I'll have to continue to consider.
Thursday, November 5, 2009
Spirtual Literacy Ch. 1
Executive Summary:
In chapter 1 Tolar-Burton introduces John Wesley, outlines her argument and defines key terms.
Wesley is situated as a man who clearly understood the power of language and therefore encouraged "ordinary Methodist men and women" to become "readers, writers, and public speakers" (1). Tolar-Burton is primarily interested in the role of Methodist women primarily because their work has gone largely unstudied regardless of their importance to the development of Methodism. Although the introduction provides an overview for subsequent chapters, the majority of the chapter provides contextual information and analysis surrounding the early development of Methodism. In total Tolar-Burton uses eight sections to separate and identify relevant traditions of the time which informed, supported and complicated Wesley’s approach to religious practices.
Questions/Challenges:
Maybe it’s just me and my very “unreligious” background but I found myself enjoying Tolar-Burton’s prose and condemning the content. I very clearly appreciate the inclusion of “ordinary” people as promoted by Wesley and am thankful for literacy artifacts that were created by followers. However, in describing the typical rhetorical elements of the Church before Wesley Tolar-Burton states, “The printed sermons of famous preachers were used liberally by the lazier or less gifted Anglican clergy as a way to avoid the burden of having to write their own sermons week after week, year after year” (15). I’m struck by the description of Church clergy as being “lazy” or “less gifted” if they utilized sermons from “famous preachers.” Perhaps it’s my new found interest in “authorship” but I wonder if drawing from and delivering “famous” sermons would be nothing more than a literacy practice or a method for keeping consistency in the doctrine?
In chapter 1 Tolar-Burton introduces John Wesley, outlines her argument and defines key terms.
Wesley is situated as a man who clearly understood the power of language and therefore encouraged "ordinary Methodist men and women" to become "readers, writers, and public speakers" (1). Tolar-Burton is primarily interested in the role of Methodist women primarily because their work has gone largely unstudied regardless of their importance to the development of Methodism. Although the introduction provides an overview for subsequent chapters, the majority of the chapter provides contextual information and analysis surrounding the early development of Methodism. In total Tolar-Burton uses eight sections to separate and identify relevant traditions of the time which informed, supported and complicated Wesley’s approach to religious practices.
Questions/Challenges:
Maybe it’s just me and my very “unreligious” background but I found myself enjoying Tolar-Burton’s prose and condemning the content. I very clearly appreciate the inclusion of “ordinary” people as promoted by Wesley and am thankful for literacy artifacts that were created by followers. However, in describing the typical rhetorical elements of the Church before Wesley Tolar-Burton states, “The printed sermons of famous preachers were used liberally by the lazier or less gifted Anglican clergy as a way to avoid the burden of having to write their own sermons week after week, year after year” (15). I’m struck by the description of Church clergy as being “lazy” or “less gifted” if they utilized sermons from “famous preachers.” Perhaps it’s my new found interest in “authorship” but I wonder if drawing from and delivering “famous” sermons would be nothing more than a literacy practice or a method for keeping consistency in the doctrine?
Thursday, October 22, 2009
Epilogue
Executive Summary-
In the epilogue Welch recounts several pivotal moments of social activism that took place at UVM and helped inform "The Crossroads" protest of 1985. She utilizes that particular protest to reflect on the activist history or UVM and propel it forward to the more current climate. She also counters the perspecitive of "oh my university has a tradition of conservatism...not like UVM," with the recounting of UVM's VERY conservative and elitest past. Her aim is provide examples of empowerement and student/faculty/citzen involvment when engagement is achieved.
Questions/Challenges (more like a personal response)-
I know we are charged with the task of reading for methods and methodology but I cannot help but to get swept away by Welch's social activism and call for more of it. I find myself reading for ways to incorporate this in my own classroom and how to remain motivated vs. apathetic about how much "voice" one person has. My students tend to believe there is "nothing" they can do about representations in media. They are willing to make amends with "the media" being like "the weather"...no one can control it. I am dismayed by this attitude when "the media" is made up people (albeit in the form of large corporations with very politically and economically driven gendas). Nonetheless, the throw-up-our-arms and deal with it approach is inadequate for burgeoning intellectuals (in my not-so-humble opinion). So I suppose my question/challenge today is how do I incorporate this in my class when I honestly know so little about it? I feel remiss to say...I haven't ever organized a protest...not even attended one...I haven't even ever submitted an "op ed" piece. My intentions and concerns are there, just not my actions. How then do I become a PROFESSor of such? I guess when I think of methods I'm thinking Welch may have approached this book through the lens of social action and rhetorical analysis and employed the very rhetorical canons that she uses to analyze social movements.
In the epilogue Welch recounts several pivotal moments of social activism that took place at UVM and helped inform "The Crossroads" protest of 1985. She utilizes that particular protest to reflect on the activist history or UVM and propel it forward to the more current climate. She also counters the perspecitive of "oh my university has a tradition of conservatism...not like UVM," with the recounting of UVM's VERY conservative and elitest past. Her aim is provide examples of empowerement and student/faculty/citzen involvment when engagement is achieved.
Questions/Challenges (more like a personal response)-
I know we are charged with the task of reading for methods and methodology but I cannot help but to get swept away by Welch's social activism and call for more of it. I find myself reading for ways to incorporate this in my own classroom and how to remain motivated vs. apathetic about how much "voice" one person has. My students tend to believe there is "nothing" they can do about representations in media. They are willing to make amends with "the media" being like "the weather"...no one can control it. I am dismayed by this attitude when "the media" is made up people (albeit in the form of large corporations with very politically and economically driven gendas). Nonetheless, the throw-up-our-arms and deal with it approach is inadequate for burgeoning intellectuals (in my not-so-humble opinion). So I suppose my question/challenge today is how do I incorporate this in my class when I honestly know so little about it? I feel remiss to say...I haven't ever organized a protest...not even attended one...I haven't even ever submitted an "op ed" piece. My intentions and concerns are there, just not my actions. How then do I become a PROFESSor of such? I guess when I think of methods I'm thinking Welch may have approached this book through the lens of social action and rhetorical analysis and employed the very rhetorical canons that she uses to analyze social movements.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
