Introduction
Before I begin, I must confess that my forte--at least as far as English is concerned--is in technical writing and English literature. In high school, I knew my teachers preferences well. I knew the drill: I was given an assignment, researched through the subject, put my thoughts on paper, revise the paper to the teacher's specific instructions, and hand it in for assessment. A few papers required me to inject my own insight and opinion on the piece of literature, and even then I had very few problems (except for revisions--I still can't stand revisions). Sometimes I found myself writing creatively during break periods--usually out of boredom, anxiety, excitement, or frustration. I had a great system going for me back in high school.
Before now, I had no idea how to employ the use of rhetoric, and I was originally not interested in learning how. I initially believed that this would be an ordinary research and composition class, and that it would be a piece of cake. But this course has put me through a crash course in rhetoric and English composition. I can see how this course encourages students to broaden their horizons, composition styles, and research methods. The bottom line is that I was very much set in my old ways, and I soon discovered that I had to reformat my writing style to fit the mold of rhetorical analysis. More importantly, I felt like I had been pushed through a meat grinder of personal responsibility and accountability. It has not been an easy road this semester.
In the end, though, it all turned out for the best. If there is anything I am proud of this semester, it is how much I've learned about speaking back to my sources, as opposed to letting them speak on my behalf. This essential skill in rhetorical composition made me realize that a paper is much, much more fulfilling if the writer is fully engaged in the conversation between his or her sources. It also influenced my thinking, in that I am constantly thinking about the tone and intent behind my writing, as well as my proposed audience. I can see myself employing this skill in my future technical writing, literature, and communication courses, and beyond that in my career.
One of my teammates wrote that the service-learning formed the basis for most of our writing assignments in English 102. I'm inclined to agree, because service of any kind is a vital part of our way of life. When I was writing my Unit Two project, I found myself referring to the service-learning project at ANSER, and I was amazed at how it made my research more relevant and more applicable to my research topic. I can honestly say that the service-learning at ANSER saved me in many ways this semester, and I'm thankful for it.
Unit One
I would be lying if I said I enjoyed Unit One. The truth is that this was my worst project in this course, and I thought it would be easy.
At first, we were doing mostly the required readings, MLA citations, and annotated bibliographies. I did most of this stuff starting in middle school, so it wasn't exactly new. Although, I thought I would never use MLA style in college (in the technology field, we are mostly required to utilize APA style), so it was a breath of fresh air in that sense. The one thing I was really annoyed with was the free-writing component. I get the concept behind this activity: writing out your thoughts causes you to think in a different and more complex manner. But a class discussion can do that as well, if not better! I'm just saying that free-writing and an in-class discussion is redundant.
I really fell on my face when it came to writing the Unit One project, because the teacher had specifically told us not to craft an argument. Furthermore, my writing was sloppy, disjointed, and it made little to no sense at all. I didn't think about the issues from the viewpoints of different writers, my personal understanding of the reading material, or about the audience I was trying to reach! In short, my Unit One project was a total bust, a complete disaster!
Unit Two
At the start of Unit Two, we talked about academic writing and its difficulty. Personally, when I looked at some of the required reading, I found them wordy and redundant. I've since come to the conclusion that some researchers like to needlessly complicate their own writing simply to make a point. I also found that some writers feel that they have to state and restate the obvious over and over again, like we're stupid or something. For example, I got tired of Joseph Harris saying that academic writing is like a conversation in different ways. What is the point of doing this? I can't speak for the rest of the class, but I don't like being treated like an idiot. Restating a key point several times in the same article is not only boring, but it's painful to read.
When I heard that the project for Unit Two was building a website dedicated to our individual topic, I was really, really nervous. I have very limited experience with programming languages like Java and HTML, and making websites was not an easy matter for me back in high school. I was very happy to find that there was a website called Weebly that makes web design easier and more efficient.
I like the fact that we were given a great amount of leeway in constructing our websites. We didn't have to worry about structure as much, as long as we could clearly convey the information in order to give our research some credibility.
That's not to say that I didn't have problems during the unit. First, I spent several hours finding a suitable design for my website. The teacher said to make it stand out in some way or other, and I believed that the first thing a potential reader will look at is the design. I originally believed that the first impression of a website's design will color the perception of the subject material being presented on it. The next hurdle I had to jump through was sorting my sources into different subject areas, which took dozens of hours. Then I had to use my sources to start a pseudo-conversation about different forms of education. But the biggest difficulty I had with this project--as well as with the revision--was "speaking back" to my sources. I had mostly let my research speak for itself instead of directly challenging my sources and complicating the conversation. In other words, I failed to lend my own voice to the debate about education.
Unit Three
I was relieved to know that the Unit Three project would be done in a group. That would cut down on my stress a little bit. In some ways, the final project was easier than the preparation, primarily because of my group. My teammates volunteered to write the interview questions, provide all the release forms, and edit the video. I volunteered to record the video at the site of ANSER Charter School. Our group was quite efficient in performing its tasks; however, we did have some problems with communications and meeting times. I attended every team meeting and participated in the discussions and the editing.
Lisa, our service-learning supervisor, was also very excited for this video. She's hoping this video would put ANSER on the map and make BSU students consider a service-learning project at ANSER.
If I remember correctly, we did two days of shooting. The first day was for the school itself, and the second day was for the interviews. Admittedly, it was my first time working a Flip camera, so the end product ended up being shaky. To justify this, our group decided that we intended to make an 'Office'-esque documentary of the student and staff interviews. In the end, I thought our video and our presentation were flawed, but I also felt that they fully communicated the information we needed to convey. All in all, it was a very fulfilling experience. We were extremely proud of the result, and I hope that ANSER will be proud as well.
Revising the Website
There were a few issues that arose while I was revising my website. In the first revision of my website, I have been concerned about "speaking back" to my sources. By that, I mean I introduced the arguments of my sources, confirmed them, and then criticized them (according to the teacher). I was trying to sort out the pros and cons of each source's claims while tying them together in some sort of agreement on a certain subject. For instance, one of my sources (Bondelli) said that the education system is composed of a social hierarchy. He made the claim that the hierarchical structure of the education system decreases the quality of learning and growth for the students. While I agree that a hierarchy exists in the school system, I pointed out that he had shown no evidence to back up his argument, and that his claim was too absolute in its reasoning to be credible. Additionally, I tried to inject my own two cents into each education method. Even now, I am still wondering if I went far enough with lending my voice to the conversation. Finally, I added a conclusions tab to my website in an attempt to connect my previous thoughts and to put forth my own views on what would constitute an ideal education system--all while acknowledging my sources. I wrapped up with an open-ended question that I've asked myself over and over again and treated it as my thesis: So how can we reform the standardized testing method of education?
http://alternativemethodsofeducation.weebly.com
No comments:
Post a Comment