I'm not sure if it's the head cold clouding up my brain or just that the readings did not strike as much as past ones, but I had a lot of trouble coming up with something interesting to say in response (and that's not to say that what will follow is actually interesting). I was not a fan of the Kastely article for a number of reasons, the foremost of which was that I could not see myself use his method for practical application in the writing classroom. I do believe that using literature as a tool for students to understand theory could be useful, but I would think twice before using Antigone as a text for a freshman writing class. I could not help but think of my own first experience with Antigone, which was at the freshman level, though in a Development of Western Civilization class and not a writing class. While we did not use the text to explore argument and the lack of it in the play, I can remember a general lackluster response to the text (other than the obvious topic of the female protagonist), and we were honors kids. What I mean to say here, is that I would be mighty afraid to use a Greek tragedy to talk about writing - while conversation could certainly flourish (plenty of crazy things happen in those plays, what with guys killing their fathers and marrying their mothers), I find it hard to see it going in the direction that Kastely pushes it. I can just see my biggest fear coming true - not getting one relevant student response during the whole class period, and me rambling on about what I wanted them to say.
My issue with Box-Logic, on the other hand, was that Sirc waited so long to get to the implementation of this theory in the writing classroom, and that when he finally got there, I wanted more from him. While he did give me some good alternative ideas for writing assignments (like the photo journal) that I would like to try out, I wanted more of a description of how he has implemented "box-logic" in his classroom. The excerpt from his student Greg's e-mail was a telling example of the success of this alternative approach to get students to write and think, and I just wanted more. That's it. More. His approach also concerned me in that English 1000 is also medium through which students learn to write papers for the rest of their college careers - responses like Greg's would most likely not be acceptable as papers or even informal responses in other classes, so what kind of preparation does this give students, other than getting them comfortable with writing and expressing themselves? Is it enough to just do that?
I forgot to think of these articles in terms of English 1000. Perhaps we need to explore different ways of writing before asking some kid to do it? It just seems like we conclude that half these articles are inapplicable to ENG 1000, but perhaps we lack imaginative thought or courage. Every week that we are with the PhDs it seems like Drew says he is going to try something new. Maybe, he is not a cynical as us, maybe things aren't working out, or maybe he is a brave teacher. That being said, this article is confusing. I got more from the number list at the end than the whole article. I will take an my uncritical seat now and play with this plank I just found in my eye.
ReplyDeleteI mentioned this in my post, but I definitely agree with your point here about Sirc's needing more. I balk at the idea that it's really enough just to get students writing about anything and in any style at all. Sirc and his box are an interesting way of thinking about alternative styles of teaching an introductory composition class, but honestly I think they would be better suited for the first month's worth of assignments in a high school creative writing class.
ReplyDeleteI’m pretty under-read in Greek tragedies, but I found Kastley’s idea to use Antigone as a text to teach rhetoric and argument intriguing. Perhaps it’s not appropriate for freshmen composition – I’ll keep your perspective in mind when I read the text.
ReplyDeleteI'm not entirely sure how I feel about teaching Antigone in Freshman composition to teach argument. I think there are way too many other issues in the play that would cloud whatever it has to say about argumentation - like the creepy brother-sister nonsense. I think that's what the students would pick up on rather than anything about argument.
ReplyDelete