The Lack of "Rational-Critical" Debate

I found the reading "The future of rational-critical debate in online public spheres" by Matthew D. Barton very interesting. I especially enjoyed how he compared present forms of rational-critical debate to the bourgeois. However, as I began to think about the blogs and wikis I have read that debate public issues,  I became less sure these are comparable forms of rational-critical debate. Of course hot topics can be discussed in both forums, however, face-to-face conversation  requires a certain level of propriety that wikis and blogs do not. As for rational, the following is a response to a debate following a video of Matt Damon talking about Sarah Palin: 

"Believing that dinosaurs were here 4,000 years ago is far less demeaning and asanine than believing the pure rhetoric that Obama spews...Only a complete idiot would but the snake oil he's selling, financial experts all agree that his proposed trillions in new federal spending would cost taxpayers dearly..."

Now I am all for rational-critical debate in the public sphere, but it seems to me that this is not the only use and probably not the most popular use for internet wikis and blogs. I actually cannot remember ever finding a blog about politics that did not have entries like the one above. 

This is also my fears about using a wiki or blog in the classroom. I understand that I can tell my students what appropriate electronic behavior is, but that does not mean they will listen. And, if I am not there to immediately acknowledge the situation and show the other students that it was dealth with, how do I know they will not all start to mimic this behavior? 

Things I take for Granted

When I was reading through Joan Huntley's "The Seven Cs of Interactive Design" I tried to imagine how I could create an interactive website that would somehow aid my students. There are plenty of grammar websites, so I would never feel the need or desire to create another, so what type of interactive website could I create that would benefit the students in my class? I am still thinking about this, and will update this when I come up with a magnificent idea!

When reading through Chapter 1 "1979-1982: The Profession's Early Experience with Modern Technology"  I really found the early history of computers in relation to instruction very interesting. I must say I am very thankful that I was not one of these writing instructors that  created programs for writing on the computer. As I kept reading I really started to think about everything I take for granted when I write a paper. I am not sure I have ever written a paper without the use of a computer, so this honestly was the first time I thought about what that would be like. As I reflected, I realized that I will never say I hate technology again: Microsoft Word should be enough reason for my change in perspective. Below I have listed some of the reflections which altered my opinion on computer technology. 

The first thing I do when I write a paper is research. Without a computer this would be a whole different ball game. I would only have access to the University Library, and if I was doing a composition history paper, this would likely be a huge problem. What if I wanted to do research in the middle of the night, or early in the morning when I woke up? I couldn't. I would have to be ready to research not on my time, but on the libraries. So the first thing I took for granted, thanks to computers and the internet, is convenience. 

Next I would start prewriting, and for this I could get by without the computer. I could write down my quotes and an outline, but I would have had to hand copy any quote I wanted to use when I went to the library to research. 

Next I need to start writing, and I guess I would spread out my handwritten notes all around me and continue to hand write my paper. So when I make changes do I cross things out and draw arrows?

 I know this is not a great new realization; however, I really had never thought about how much easier my student life was made by computers. They have not only made my life easier, but they have saved me time and allowed me to work on a paper whenever I want (24 hours a day!). Even in high school I turned in papers that I had typed on a computer. I cannot imagine what a revision process of a thesis would be like on a type writer! I guess what I am trying to say is I am glad people like Lisa Gerrard and her students were not stopped by sneering engineers who thought writing on computers was "mickey mouse".

Bridging the Gap

There were a few parts of the reading that really caught my attention, and made me think long and hard about the general ideas behind a composition class. The example of David Damon, I think, is far more common than any teacher would like to recognize. David was in college in 1999, and he seemed to be ahead of the times. I have had plenty of students who were unable to leave their computer or phone talk behind when they began writing for class, and as teachers, we need to find a way to deal with this (not by failing them).  Selfe's article seems to point out the fact that David didn't fail because of inability or lack of intelligence, but rather, because his teachers were unable to find a way to connect his life and experiences with what he was supposed to be learning in class. I recognize that text speak and Internet dialog is not considered proper diction for academia, but somehow we need to find a way to bridge the gap between how students write in their personal and professional lives. If people, like David, can be so successful in business and website design, should they be dismissed from a university because they couldn't pass a comp class? David is already doing well, but couldn't he possibly be doing better with a few business or design classes under his belt? It seems that there is something drastically wrong here. Of course I believe that writing is an important tool for every individual, and I think that David gave teachers a glimpse of today almost 20 years ago. Just because students can't form a sentence in a manner that the teacher considers "proper", does that mean the meaning is lost? If students can communicate, and in David's case I would venture to say communicate well, then there is no doubt that we can and should find a way to make room for these people in our classrooms. 

Another thing I wanted to mention briefly, was the activity "colorful handwriting" Anne Wysocki talks about. This idea really excited me! I am not sure I could incorporate it into the class (Eng 111) I am teaching now. However, in the future I would really like to. As soon as I read it I could see the benefits of this exercise--not to mention how much fun it would be. I think it would be an especially interesting way to look at tone. I know that if I was doing this assignment, I would use red when angry, blue when calm, etc. I wonder if others would do the same? Sorry for the tirade, I just really thought that was a neat activity.