Class Presentation

What have I learned about this class? What do I have to say about what I've learned?

1. Wht does Ecofeminism/Ecocriticism have to do with this class?
   I wanted to explore what teaching feminism/ecology/ecocriticism in a composition classroom would entail and why one would need to teach it?
   Pertinent Questions:What are the politics and policies that kept/keep women and minorities suppressed and how does that relate to how the environment is often subjugated?
   I see things like women's suffrage and and Civil Rights to be similar to the avenue taken to form the EPA. What are the politics of something intended to be liberatory and how does that relate to literacy? What are those politics? And what the dynamic before and after the change occurred?
   Too bad the environment is an inanimate object; otherwise, more legislation would be in effect to liberate something that is so oppressed.
   THE GOVERNMENT DOESN'T WANT THE ENVIRONMENT TO BE ABLE TO READ
   GEORGE BUSH HATES BLACK PEOPLE AND THE ENVIROMNET. (SEE BELOW)
2. Pop Culture/Film/Advertising: What does that have to do with the class?

I wanted to identify what rhetoric is and how it is defined now.

I think that Aristotle would see Rhetoric completely different if he were alive today.

I see TV/Film/Music/Advertising as definitive forms of contemporary rhetoric.

I say this due to the dynamic in which they operate (orator/audience/message form is

predominantly seen in advertising) as opposed to the rhetoric seen in something composed on

paper.

Film/Television also have product placement.

To tie it with the above, most people are subject to this rhetoric of consumerism which has

often been at the expense and exploitation of the Environment.

_____________________________________________________________________________

Finally, I wish to tie both of the above issues together with Eco composition.

Exploring practical ways to green the process of literacy. Is literacy going green?

Things like socioeconomic play a role in almost anything and definitely the politics of greening literacy

What are the pros and cons that teachers face when attempting to incorporate sustainable pedagogies?

What is the inherent rhetoric in going “green?”

Whose interest is really at hand?

What would one, ideally, wish to achieve from a no-impact sustainable English Department?

Would this improve learning?

Books:

Owens, Derek. Composition and Sustainability: Teaching For a Threatened Generation. NCTE, 2001. Print

Weisser, Christian J., Sidney J, Dobrin (eds): Ecocomposition: Theoretical and Pedagogical Approaches. Albany, NY: State University of New York, 2001. Print.

Duffy, John, Martin Nystrand. Towards a Rhetoric of Everyday Life: New Directions in Research On Writing, Text, and Discourse. Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin Press, 2003. Print.

Week 12 Response: Short And Not So Sweet

 

     I know it was just an opinion piece on Canagarajah, but I thought the authors should have explained their intentions with translingualism more thoroughly. The opinion article also seemed to be independent and that is another reason it should have explained itself better. The paper seemed to spend the first half of the article explaining why a translingual approach can be beneficial and the last part giving poor (and biased) examples that did not clarify anything. I'm still confused as to how a translingual approach to English should be implemented and what it would actually look like. They (pro-translingualists) had a lot of theory behind this and not much substance. Maybe my expectations for this type of approach are just too high? I was really thinking that all of these people who authored this paper would have more to say: Let the reader know how assignments will work and what topics will be covered and what exactly a translingual writing assignment will focus on. The paper suffices as a “mission statement” of sorts, but such academic theories and teaching styles need to be better explained if they want more people to buy into them.

"Language Difference in Writing: Toward a Translingual Approach:" Executive Summary

 

     This article introduces the reader to some of the issues and approaches dealt with in Canagarajah'a article in regards to trying to incorporate diverse linguistic flavors into an English-oriented curriculum. Some intial points made by the opinion article  are that even a mono linguistic, English speaker can technically be multilingual and the NCTE and CCCC encourage this type of idology. Early on, also, it is indicated that a monolingualist can achieve a certain level of "translingualism."  This is due, in part, to the many dialects and spheres in which “standard” English operates. There is also a distinction made between what “standard” English is and what “edited American English” is. The latter would be something done in an academic setting, such as an essay. Three objectives are outlined in is article as to what translingualism, in a classroom, would appreciate: (1) honoring the power of all language users to shape language to specific ends; (2) recognizing the linguistic heterogeneity of all users of language both within the United States and globally; and (3) directly confronting English monolingualist expectations by researching and teaching how writers can work with and against, not simply within, those expectations.

   The authors explain that they wish to only understand language better and not necessarily just English. They see this initiative as exploring the hows, whys and whats of language. The authors of this move in teaching plan for this agenda to infiltrate all layers of society, from the working class person to the college student. The authors of this paper see the exploring of various linguistic styles, as implemented into the classroom, to be a form of democracy and granting civil rights to all. It is intended to take traditional views of composition and bend them enough as to where this “translingualism” will become the standard in how to deal with “English” and  other (ESL) students coming into a composition classroom.

     At the paper's conclusion, a series of questions about this type of teaching are posed by the authors and it's contributors. The questions help to explore the actual utility of translingualism and what it would look like in a classroom. Questions like “How can a a monolingual instructor teach such a class? My students are all monolingual, do they need to learn a multilingual approach to composition? Doesn't one need to master his/her native tongue before trying this type of approach?” are all asked by this paper. The responses to these qustions, although slightly indirect and posed by the researchers themselves, indicated a positive response in favor of a translingual approach to reading/writing. Go figure.