Week 6 - Deconstruction

I feel like I was being quoted on page 111-112.  I am the girl that was taught about deconstruction and cried and felt cheated and wished nobody had taught me that.  I can remember today the first time that I learned about Deconstruction.  I was in college and I was one of the youngest kids in class.  Everyone else had done the reading and the work and I knew that they had learned the same thing, but nobody was saying anything.  I wanted to say something but didn't cuz I didn't want to be 'that girl.'  Finally, at the end of class they started discussing how depressing this theory was and how it made everything seem so useless and meaningless.  I was relieved that I was not the only one that had felt this way.

I don't want to teach this theory to my students.  I don't want to give them that terrible feeling.  It took me years, seriously years, to get over this theory.  Actually, this blog reveals that I'm still not quite over it.  I spent so much time learning to look for meaning in literature and life.  For one theory alone to throw all of that away was devastating.  I don't want my students to experience that.  Some of my students may go to college, but the reality is that most won't.  The ones that do go to college will most likely experience deconstruction of some sort when they get there.  The ones that don't do to college, can they live without never knowing deconstruction, I think so.

I really want to teach literary theory next year with my highest level class.  Can I teach the other theories and skip deconstruction?  At least until I'm comfortable teaching theory?  Am I taking too much away from theory if I just skip one?  Is it unfair to teach only what I am comfortable?  Would this be too censored or biased if I forget to teach the one that makes me upset?  What if I only mention it briefly and place a lot more focus on the ones that I like and think are helpful more than hurtful?

Week 5 - Writing

Preaching to the choir. I really enjoy reading M&M because of the way it seems to be echoing my thoughts, or is it my thoughts are echoing their ideas. Either way, I'm on board with this book. While I would normally try and create a coherent, connected, and creative piece of writing...I can't this week. You see its not only the 4th of July weekend, it's also my birthday weekend, and SummerFest, and most of all SUMMER. So, I jotted down some thoughts while I was reading (all 6 chapters that I'm supposed to teach on Monday) and I'm going to share them with you.

1. I loved Chapter 6s Ideas about composition. However, I have had problems in the past with having kids revise and edit. My students HATE rewriting, even refuse to rewrite. They are stuck in the I finished it, I'm not redoing it mindset. Then anything that I would suggest they edit is simply thrown back with a "I spell checked it, its good." When I tried to have them write papers long-hand, pen and paper, style and then type them-forcing a revision stage-they then refused to hand write it the next time or thrown in the disclaimer that if they wrote it out they wouldn't type it because they aren't doing anything twice. I have not yet mastered how to motivate for and demonstrate the beauty of a second draft. (Even as I write that I know I'm going to hit spell check and not go back to revise this blog- I'm one of them).

2. As it said in the grammar section, teaching grammar is complicated. I tried to teach grammar as a DOL or daily activity last year and it didn't seem effective for the first quarter. After that, I kept a running list in my lesson plan book of errors that I commonly saw in my student's writing and heard in their speech. It was awesome to do mini-lessons, often random, and using their own work to demonstrate a part of grammar. I always prefaced it with, "you can use that speech and writing in emails or with with friends, but when you interview, are at work, or any other professional situation, including English class, make sure to use the proper way so that you sound 'educated.'" I straight-up explained that professional people love proper grammar and will hold it against you if you can't use it. They agreed, accepted, and even tried to change their language. Anyway, it seemed effective even though I'm sure I'll be teaching the same things next year.

3. I must confess that as a native English speaker and English major that I didn't understand English (grammatically) until I moved to another country. Learning a 2nd language made me understand English better. And teaching English to non-native English speakers REALLY taught me a lot about our own language. I think this experience should be required for Masters of English (much more so than a Summer School field).

4. It didn't mention it in these sections (that I saw) but I really appreciate the standard v. slang/urban translations. In my classroom the kids really enjoy taking rap songs and creating a 'pretty' poem or discussion. I think it teaches grammar, audience, spelling, syntax, diction, etc. You all should sign up for UrbanDictionary.com's word of the day emails. My first one was 'skeet' and the kids loved it.

Now, questions/requests.
Try using the sentence "Buffalo buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo" to explain grammar.
Has anyone seen the sentence where if you add punctuation you can change the meaning of the sentence from a sexist comment against men to against women? I would love to have it but can't find it.
Has anyone also seen the sentence where you can change the meaning of it by using different sounds for the letters based on the sounds they make in different words?
I would love more fun and hilariously irritating ways to demonstrate the ambiguity of Standard English Grammar rules.

Week 4 - Marxism

Better late than never?

I just read the 3rd chapter of Appleman and really got involved in the example with Hamlet. I did not, however, become involved because I felt that my classroom could use the example to the extent that I could. I teach in essentially the direct opposite type of class that was used in the example. I teach in inner-city, almost totally black, and almost totally poverty stricken surroundings. All of my students would have been in the 5th circle with a few that would claim the 4th circle. In the example the teacher was met with some hostility because some of his students seemed defensive over their positions of given power. I feel that opening a Marxist conversation would create hostility of a different sort in my classroom.

For example, I read Othello last year with my students because I thought that it would provide them with the greatest chance of having something to relate to while reading Shakespeare. (Teenagers are steaming with passion, jealousy, insecurities, and manipulation). However, I could not get the students to see Othello as any more than yet another attack on blacks. Even after partnering with the history teacher to teach about the culture and times of Shakespeare and the history of prejudice and racism the students still wanted to focus on their struggles today. While I had hoped to give the students an experience with human emotions and vulnerability all I seemed to give them was yet another reason to hate the white man and another example of keeping the black man down. I was (without intending) doing somewhat of a Marxist reading on Othello and it fell apart on me, I wanted to expose and reveal and I ended up angering and justifying.

Another fear I have over Marxist: creating an us vs. them sentiment. There have been many times, (I'm the only white person in the room besides my white co-teacher, I'm middle class and he's upper-middle/lower-upper (Whitefish(Whitefolks) Bay)), when my students use terms such as 'you guys' and 'white people' and 'rich people' and just plain 'you' to refer to my 'people.' I fear that having a more focused discussion about the oppressed and powerless will only cause my students to broaden that gap rather than embrace differences or understand how to work the system.

I wonder if this is just me and my own battles with stereotyping/racism sometimes. I don't feel like I'm racist or classist but sometimes I feel that I'm walking on eggshells trying too hard not to offend. I think that Marxism is a very important and needed critique to be applied to literature and life in general. I just also feel that it's a very personal and sensitive topic for a lot of people and that it needs to be handled carefully. Do you all see how this could be an awkward topic in my situation? Or do you think I'm not giving my students enough credit for being able to get beyond their own situations?

Week 3 - Literary Theory

I read the first 3 chapters of _Critical Encounters_ on the plane from Milwaukee to Denver.  While I enjoyed reading the chapters I couldn't help but feel that it was preaching to the choir and that too much of it was common sense.  I kept feeling like there was too much talk.  

However, I did appreciate reading about the 4 vignettes.  It was nice to see how different it would look with different crowds.  I know that teaching where I teach it is easy to hear people shout out their different interpretations of scenes, characters, or situations.  However, I think that the hard part is going to be trying to get the students to at least consider another students position or opinion.  

I also like that by teaching the different critiques I will be able to touch a lot on some of the character traits, the differing perspectives, and mainly how to separate yourself from your reaction and try to see it from another person's position.  I believe that my classroom can be more like a social studies/psychology/English class that just a language class. I also believe that teaching students to read for the sole purpose of reading and to have their own responses.  Life isn't about focusing on your own reactions to what you see.  It's about taking other's views into consideration and coming to some sort of global position or higher level of understanding of life in general.

Anyway, I'm enjoying the book and can't wait to get deeper into the other responses.  I hope that you all don't mind my brief and topical response tonight but I'm thinking I'll be back on track next week.  Could you all let me know if you thought the reading was pretty obvious?

Week 2 - Kumashiro

4 different ways, and none of them flawless, for teaching about differences.  I like the first strategy, we should make sure to give every student the same opportunities and the necessary resources to develop holistically.  I also like the second method, we should definitely educate about differences.  However, I agree that we as educators would never have enough time to cover everybody in every way.  The 3rd option is also solid, we should be critical of differences and where they have come from and how they developed.  However, can we teach students to be critical thinkers without focusing on each and every stereotype out there.  And as for the 4th option, I fully buy into the ideology that our students will use their knowledge to change things that are not fair or right in the world.  However, in the 180 hours I have with each student (for just one year) that I must share among 30 other students is not much compared to the real world where they will be confronted with stereotypes 24 hours a day, every day, no summer breaks, no weekends.

I guess what I am saying is that I hope that through my guidance my students do turn out to be critical thinkers and pushers of positive change in the world.  However, maybe this can be more imbedded in the curriculum that this article seems to want it.  I think that this article fits right in with a previous classes discussion about whether character educations should be implicit or not.  I guess I was a little back and forth then and I still am now.  I think that there were some very simple and easy to implement ways to change the wording of questions and statements so that students can see the true impact and magnitude of having "others."  I also see the difficulty in unlearning something as strong as a cultural belief.  In my current situation I have had the term "blood is thicker than water" floating in my thoughts for a while.  Where I feel that I can use some of the mentioned techniques and ideologies to try and re-educate my students, I also feel that they may simply listen to get the grade and then go home and hate fags and queers and Mexicans all the same because daddy knows best.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying I won't try or that I don't think it's a nobel cause... its just kind of complicated and deeper than the article seems to make it.  My students are some of the most racist, homophobic teens I've ever met and I know for a fact that they become physically angry when it is suggested the gay isn't a sin/disease/crime of the highest degree.  I will however try to continue to open their eyes to new possibilities as that is my philosophy of what teaching is, simply revealing other options.

Before I close for the day, I would like to say that this article has opened my eyes to my own reactions to others.  I have been using a version of the military's "don't ask/don't tell" policy in my classroom.  I have blacks, males, females, Asians, whites, queers and straights, mental situations and physical situations, and people of both lower and middle classes (and I'm sure I could break them down further into different categories of others) and I teach them all exactly the same.  I previously acted as if we were all the same and we should avoid pointing out our differences or stereotypes of one another.  Has anyone else felt that this article will change the way they handle certain situations or even their whole lifestyle involving others?

Week 1 Readings

At some point... might as well be now... I would like to say that all too often I feel the teenage angst towards school creeping back in.  Maybe its because its beautiful outside and I have enough work to finish to spend every waking hour of the weekend at my desk.  Maybe its because I'm with high school students 40 hours a week and sometimes it seems they influence me more than I influence them.  Or maybe its just one of my greatest flaws/attributes.

Anyway the reason I say this is because I loved reading Golub.  He mentioned a lot of great activities that I feel I can actually implement immediately into my classroom.  It actually inspired me to begin my notecard rolodex of useful classroom activities/projects/assessments that I can keep on my desk for moments of teacher's block.  Reading his book was fast and easy and exciting!  I felt young at heart and motivated.

Then I felt like those other high schoolers when I began reading Maxwell & Meiser.  I felt like I'd already heard this stuff a thousand times before.  I was bored and felt like I was being lectured, again, about things that I had already been tested on.  Granted I only made it half way through the 3rd chapter, so far, but I still was struggling and forcing the reading.  I admit that the first chapter on why we want to teach is worth knowing and a nice reminder for those of us that forget amongst the due dates and readings and self-assessments.  I also admit that the second chapter on teenagers reminded me to see my students and the crazy, illogical, hormonal beings that they are and to remember that they really are out of control.  However, it was so long.  I also appreciate the continued optimism and inspirational words that chapter 3 has started out with, but I really just want to be told what to do at this point.

Maybe its the weather, maybe its the physical difference of the books, light and bright vs. heavy and blah, but I hope to finish the readings by tomorrow so that when I respond to all of your beautiful posts I will have great things to say!

Later Chicas!