reading reflection for 9-9-09

As someone who is only now dipping my toes into the many theoretical approaches to teaching English, I’ve often found discussions of theory to be intimidating and overwhelming, as if this area will expose my lack of familiarity with the field and my deficit of expertise. The two readings from Zebroski helped allay some of my fears, as he frames the issue of learning and employing theory as something that’s organic and altogether implicit in the act of teaching, whether or not one can articulate one’s perspective. Though I’ve often perceived theory as being impractical and often divorced from the actual realities of the classroom, the idea of theory and practice being “answerable” to each other makes perfect sense, and Zebroski’s call that teachers be more conscious of their theoretical biases and how they inform the classroom process seems obvious (though I admittedly hadn’t given it much thought). Further, presenting composition as the “intersection of context, text, self, and society,” is helpful is conceptualizing an approach to engaging students where they are when they enter the class and how to keep them engaged throughout the course.

Zebroski does well to move from the theoretical to the practical in his presentation of various curriculum ideas is instructive for developing a course that could effectively serve a wide range of students. In particular, the idea of constructing a course around a particular theme is intriguing, though I can imagine the difficulty in picking a topic that isn’t too narrow or stifling to creative thought. Though the approach in selecting a topic would be to choose something that would be universal enough that every student would have some investment in the discussion, I fear that some students could receive a topic such a “work” or “education” with indifference and then be tied to it throughout the semester. Could a single course allow students to pick from multiple areas of focus and then allow those students to work in smaller groups of individuals who have chosen that same topic? Regardless of the focus, Zebroski’s emphasis on metawriting techniques seems, in theory, to be something that would force writers to be more conscious of their process and what they think is successful, and his idea of having writers respond to teacher comments seems like a good way of engaging a student and teacher in the act of actively collaborating in the compositional process.

Zebroski’s exploration of the ethnography assignment seems like an excellent way of drawing a writer into a greater awareness of his or her surrounding community and how one can be both a participant and observer. I don’t doubt his findings that students receive this assignment favorably, though his suggestion that they need to spend five to ten hours a week outside of class working on the assignment seems likely to meet resistance. Further, having gone to a small college in a rural area, I wonder if some colleges would be limited in their ability to provide such cross-cultural opportunities.

Additionally, Zebroski’s discussion of the using the group as a central part of the learning process strikes a chord with me, as I saw firsthand how a group dynamic can create its own energy and provide learning opportunities that are impossible in situations where a teacher is solely directing the flow of energy. From my experience, this is a delicate and often incomprehensible process, and I can relate to the mystery that Zebroski says he has experiencing when a group congeals and finds its own collaborative spirit halfway through a semester.

Finally, Williamson’s exploration of language and grammar acquisition is surprising but makes sense from my experience. From what I recall, it seems that I acquired my understanding of proper grammar and speech from listening to my parents speak and through imitating the books that I had read. Interestingly, I know that neither of my parents were raised by parents who used proper grammar, so it seems to me that they must have picked this up later, probably through their experiences reading and with higher education. Still, I know that both of them speak with a Western Pennsylvanian dialect (as I do, at times), so I can see Williamson’s argument from a few different perspectives.