When I was in elementary school, I was an avid reader. My favorite activity was reading; I did it all the time. Often, I would become so absorbed in a book that I became completely oblivious to what was happening around me; I would not hear when my mom asked me a question; I would have no idea what the conversation going on in the room was about, because I was so focused on my book. My mom would have to tell me "Ten more minutes and then you have to go to bed," and ten minutes later I would say, "I'm almost done with this chapter, then I'll go to bed."
I wish I could focus on reading in the same way now. Jacobs' metaphor that reading for the fascination of it is like traveling to Narnia made a lot of sense to me. I still like to read, but 1) I have too much required reading during school to read for pleasure (except for the newspaper) and 2) I get easily distracted while I am reading, my mind wanders, and I find that I can only read a couple pages before I look up and my eyes glaze over, and then I have to go back and re-read the last page. In one of the comments on Jacobs' article, a man says when his childhood fascination with reading went away, he could only replace it with reading on the internet, with its multitude of hyperlinks and never-ending possibilities. Sosnoski would probably like that, as he advocates hyper-reading for reasons other than the fact it saves paper (not one of his points, but valid).
All of these ideas relate to Hill, whose article I found quite interesting. In school, we are given rules for writing papers. Use only 12 point, Times New Roman font, always double space, etc. When I studied in Argentina, one of my teachers had a huge aversion to Times New Roman, so she required that we use Arial, an interesting argument for the importance of aesthetics in writing.
It is easy to imagine why people would shoot down Hill's article as irrelevant, because it advocates changing the paradigm of what should be considered literature, and what rhetoric, and what art, and whether there should be a distinction between the three. The more I learn, the more I think that we cannot just study the "classics" in literature and graduate with the ability to make a difference in the world. This class, Digital Rhetorics and Multimodal Writing, is a huge slap in the face. You thought that Shakespeare was the epitome of literature? Nobody cares, they're too busy watching YouTube.
On page 126, Hill states, "pedagogical efforts should be aimed toward helping students deal with combinations of picture, word, and symbol," and adds that images "are essential for expressing, and therefore for knowing, things that cannot be expressed in any other form."
As a future English teacher, I find this overwhelming. There is only so much that can be taught in one class, as Hill points out on 147, and how to prioritize is going to be a struggle. How can I tell my students to type in 12-point Times New Roman while teaching them that the aesthetic appearance of a text is equally as important as its content? I would be crushing their opportunity for artistic expression, crushing their personality.
Rhetoric fascinates me, because it disregards confines in favor of sending an effective message. How to bring this into the classroom seems to be evolving, as people begin to get comfortable enough to shift their paradigms.
I have nothing educational to say in response to this post; I just want to tell you how freakin hilarious it was! "You thought that Shakespeare was the epitome of literature? Nobody cares, they're too busy watching YouTube."-This may be the funniest thing I've read, school-related, this semester, so much so that I may even repeat it somewhere. And to add to your childhood story, my mom wouldn't let me drive alone even with my license the first few weeks I had it, because she was convinced I'd get lost. I spent every single car ride, whether it was five minutes or five hours, with my head in a book until I was 14.
ReplyDeleteI can empathize with your fears about what will be required of teachers in the future, regarding multiple modes of teaching/learning. But my personal experience is making me less afraid of that. Professor Michael Sexson has worked with his Wizard, Rio Gonzales, as a McNair mentor. Rio's area of research is just this, mulitmodal pedagogy. While Prof. Sexson speaks, Rio is at the computer pulling up images, text, definitions, etc. It made the class experience so amazingly visual, rich and interesting. The day may come when all teachers have a 'wizard' like Rio who can assist the teacher and enhance the classroom experience for all.
ReplyDeleteAnd as Hill states:"Visual forms of rhetoric have always existed and have always served important functions in society." Maybe it's time we acknowledge it and purposefully bring it into the classroom.
Karen, having shared a couple classes with you now, I've come to appreciate your quick wit and bluntness, but I think I appreciated this post more than anything else of yours that Ive read. the Shakespeare vs YouTube comment was spot on (and so freakin' funny!). You're right about that: to be relevant, we have to think and write in other modes, but if institutional structures (like education) still value traditional ways that confine our ability to be relevant to the current generation, you definitely will have your work cut out for you as an English teacher.
ReplyDeleteOn a personal note, however, I think you are every bit equal to the challenge. I have come to believe that people cannot really act other than they are--or, maybe I can say it better this way--what people value will show through in the way they interact with others, no matter what other constraints gather about to hinder. In your post you say so beautifully, "Rhetoric fascinates me, because it disregards confines in favor of sending an effective message." I have been trying to find compact ways to define rhetoric for over a year now, and never once have I come across anything so beautiful and accurate as that. (That goes in my quote book.) With poetry like that flowing from what you think, feel and believe, you can't help but be able to be the kind of teacher that young people need to be able to navigate a world of such ornate technology and such rich textual history. Loved your post (obviously!).
Karen, I really wish a lot of english teachers would listen to you about only reading the classics as justification for being enough to change the environment around you. I have only met a few professors that would take the chance to shoot down your argument (cough, Gwen Morgan, cough, cough), but most professors here seem to be really headed towards the direction of expanding towards multiple modes of teaching to help students expand their horizons. It is both a scary and exciting time, in my opinion, to be either a student or a teacher in this growing age where information is being transferred and expanded all the time.
ReplyDelete