|
In the broadest philosophical sense, I feel
that learning best happens when it is pursued unfettered.
In other words, a healthy suspension of judgment is a helpful
element in creating the freedom necessary for acquiring
established knowledge, not to mention an absolutely essential
component in the development of new knowledge. It is with
that first principle in mind that I like to evoke Orwell's
term "doublethink." My usage here implies a recuperation
of the term, a more positive application of a word steeped
in what I concede are insidious connotations. The Good Learner,
I believe, is one who is able to simultaneously hold multiple
viewpoints, hold them against one another with equal intellectual
investment, and synthesize that activity into something
far greater than what the initial question anticipated.
For the Good Learner, doublethink is an indispensable tool.
In the classroom, my role as teacher is to facilitate this
activity among my students. I like to think of myself as
a Sophist in the best possible sense of the word: one who
aids the class in seeing issues from different perspectives,
in different voices, with different agendas. . . one who
in this process shows how all of these differences
can be "right" to an extent, acknowledging certain
contingencies. To those ends, I like to encourage my students
to develop dissoi logoi, the construction of equally
plausible counterarguments, not simply to shore up their
own positions, but also to help them determine whether or
not that initial position is worth adhering to in the first
place. For instance, a revision exercise I've used on occasion
in my freshman writing classes centers around a mock trial:
a draft of a student's argumentative essay is put on the
stand, and prosecution and defense teams argue the merits
of its major claims, while posing counterarguments that
complicate them. Many points raised in this debate serve
as material for a much stronger revision, and the energy
generated by such an exercise usually outpaces that of conventional
workshop sessions. Another example, this one more of a conceptual
exercise in understanding visual rhetoric, is something
I've dubbed the "high art remix." Using image-manipulating
software such as Adobe Photoshop, students are asked to
select a piece of "high art" (Edvard Munch's The
Scream, Leonardo da Vinci's The Last Supper,
or Botticelli's Birth of Venus, for instance) and
create a parody of the piece, along with an "artist's
rationale" statement, that demonstrates an awareness
of the implicit or explicit cultural values expressed by
the original and how the parody works to subvert or undercut
such values. Whether assigning traditional essay prompts
or, as I am increasingly doing, having my students develop
new media writing projects which employ a variety of electronic
media, my overall goals are the same: to help students cultivate
an awareness of how arguments are constructed, how they
can be refuted, and how audiences come to be persuaded by
them. This rhetorical understanding is one that crosses
all genres, all media, and every manner of discourse.
In conjunction with the theories set forth
by Paulo Freire, I feel my duty in the class is to pose
problems rather than send down directives from the academic
pedestal. I never make claims to absolute knowledge in my
classroom, and I stress that my students have as much claim
to information as does anyone in the academy; it goes without
saying that they should have some say in how that information
helps generate knowledge. It is my hope that when students
leave my classroom, they not only have a better understanding
of the skills necessary to carry out the sometimes exclusionary
task of academic discourse, but they also see that there's
no small degree of performance wrapped up in how
the world communicates. This carries over into how we think
about the materiality of that communication as well, from
diction and organizational strategies to vocal tone or choice
of medium. When students are simultaneously able to see
how a message is crafted and can adeptly analyze the information
contained within, then doublethink has occurred.
Teaching
Observations
Keith Manecke, WPA
FYWP Observation
Friday, March 3, 2000
On Tuesday, February 21, I observed Ben McCorkle's
English 110 class. Ben's teaching style was both casual
yet authoritative. His students clearly had a great deal
of interest in what Ben had to say, and they demonstrated
a great deal of respect towards Ben's informal classroom
presence.
Ben began the class by returning a set of
the students' essays, while at the same time making general
comments about the work as a whole. Ben emphasized the quality
of much of the work, but also took the opportunity to reiterate
the importance of revision in these essays. He also made
some very effective points about the use of less formal
writing in some of the essays, explaining how students should
always be aware of the context of their writing now and
in the future, and how the appropriate level of formality
will always be determined by the expectations of each assignment.
Ben then made a nice shift from the discussion
of the essays being returned to the next essays the students
would be working on, an essay on public literacies. Ben
engaged the class in a collaborative invention exercise
for this assignment and, to encourage student involvement
and accountability, asked for a volunteer to record the
class' brainstorming ideas on the board. Ben initiated the
discussion by asking a student to share an idea he had discussed
with Ben prior to class--a move that nicely began the exercise
with a student voicing his own idea. Other students quickly
entered the discussion in a productive way, following up
on their peers' ideas as well as offering new ideas of their
own. Ben was very effective in leading this activity--keeping
the students involved, calling on students to elicit a range
of ideas and opinions, guiding these comments when needed--but
was also willing to let the students explore their own ideas
in a very open manner.
After this very fruitful exercise, Ben offered
a concrete example of some of the ideas the class had been
discussing regarding public literacies. Ben played two songs--one
by alt-rock gurus REM, and one by 80s punk rockers Black
Flag--that each offered a critique of mass media, but in
very different ways. As preface to this listening, I should
note, Ben reminded the class of their quarter-long consideration
of rhetorical situations and asked them to keep these ideas
in mind when listening to these two songs. After listening
to the songs, Ben initiated a productive discussion of how
these two songs approached the same topic in very different
ways. The class offered very intelligent comments on how
considerations of audience, genre, and speaker influenced
the effectiveness of each song to convey its idea successfully.
Ben contextualized this activity and the discussion that
ensued as further evidence that how something is said can
often be as important as what is said.
After a brief break, Ben introduced a small-group
activity that allowed the students to engage actively with
these ideas regarding rhetorical situations and public literacies.
The class was divided into three groups, and each group
received a topic for which they had to construct an effective
media campaign. For example, one group's topic was Charles
Manson for president; another group had to market hardcore
rapper Ol' Dirty Bastard to suburban mothers. Again, Ben
prefaced the activity with a useful reminder of how rhetorical
choices the students made in these mock-campaigns were similar
to the choices they make as writers. Once the activity began,
Ben circulated among the groups to keep the students on
task and answer any questions they may have had. After tending
to the needs of each group, Ben recognized that one group
in particular was struggling with the activity more than
the others. Ben seized this opportunity for more direct
interaction with the students, taking the time to assist
this group with their project and continuously asking questions
to help these students through their initial resistance.
The end result was highly effective, as this group was quite
successful in presenting their ideas and campaign strategies
to the rest of the class. Ben closed the class by reiterating
the connections between the activities the students had
done and the writing they were continuing to work on. Thus,
the importance of writing was never allowed to become secondary,
even with the varied and engaging activities completed during
this class period.
***
Frank Darwiche
PhD in English, OSU
14 January 2002
Ben spent the first few minutes of his class speaking to
his students about their upcoming papers and answering a
few
questions they had concerning them. Afterwards, he had them
sign up for in-class presentations. He gave his students
the opportunity to choose from any reading they liked. This
process took approximately 15 minutes, during which Ben
entertained questions about the assignments detailed on
his syllabus.
Ben then proceeded with his lesson for the day, which involved
readings from the class text Seeing & Writing.
It appeared
that most of the students had done the reading for the day,
as Ben posed questions to nearly every student in his class,
eliciting smart answers on the whole. Some students were
more willing to answer than others, and Ben showed special
awareness of this fact by making sure he included those
who may not have participated in discussion: he did so by
calling on them directly, rather than always letting those
who raised their hands speak. As a result, the class became
very lively and
after the first few minutes, everyone seemed to engage in
various debates about the day’s reading (I don’t
recall the specific reading, though I do remember that it
had to do with how gender roles are entrenched in the visual
images of the mass media).
Ben had prepared questions on a sheet of paper. He used
them to start conversations and debates; however, from what
I could tell, he did not restrict himself to those questions
but added others, which he tailored to the answers one student
or another gave, in such a way that they opened up newer
issues and allowed the students to think about their answers,
redefine, or reinform them. Ben seemed especially adept
at thinking on his feet, and his students responded to this
energy. He always designed his questions to include issues
that were relevant to American diversity. He often spoke
of the image of women in the media and literature, of racial
issues, ethical problems in American politics, and so on,
but always in such a manner that they pertained to the readings
at hand.
When Ben spoke about women in this particular class, he
showed pictures from magazines, which he circulated around
the room. He also had some transparencies prepared which
illustrated women in advertisements from the 30s, 50s, and
the 90s. He did so in the middle of the conversation and
shifted the focus at this point from written text to image.
This piqued the students’ interest and gave new impetus
to the conversation. He also told his students that he had
prepared a Powerpoint
presentation but had somehow had problems with his computer
at home and was unfortunately unable to put the presentation
on disk.
All in all, I found Ben’s teaching engaging and his
methods for maintaining a high level of discussion participation
very effective. Ben exhibits a very relaxed manner that
his students seem to appreciate. Still, he manages to be
conscientious at the same time: he started class on time,
gave his students a short break between the periods, and
saw three students after class.
Evaluations
|
Ohio State Student Evaluation of
Instruction (SEI) Summaries:
 --For
cumulative SEI table, click here.
|
Georgia Tech Course Instructor
Opinion Survey (CIOS):
--For
CIOS summaries, click here.
|
[Response scale is Likert-type
with 5 being high and 1 being low.]
***
Discursive Evaluation Feedback Excerpts:
English 110/110C
- "Ben was the bomb!"
- "He would give you ideas and try to help you work
w/what you wrote. He didn't tear up your paper, but instead
helped you expand your ideas."
- "His responses were very useful; they told us what
needed to be done and we got ideas on how to change it."
- "Written responses were very helpful in the revision
of the paper; verbal responses were also helpful in the
thought process."
- "He did a very good job, especially maintaining and
keeping the learning environment open."
- "This course is different than what I thought it
would be, but in a good way. I think I have benefitted in
many ways, including better writing and critical thinking
skills."
English 367.01/367.01C
- "I had heard good things about this
course and instructor from a student who previously had
you. I honestly (not trying to suck up!) can't think of
anything. I have recommended this class to friends!"
- "This course was one of my favorite courses I have
taken at OSU. I liked the fact that Ben let us think on
our own and he was not worried about strict guidelines like
other teachers."
- "I think I learned a lot about important and/or new
issues in America today. I think this is a class that all
students should take to gain more insight on our society."
- "The course was very different from what I was expecting.
However I really enjoyed it. Ben made the class fun and
exciting as well as academically oriented. I feel that I
have learned a lot about society and the way we as a society
perceive one another."
- "I really enjoyed this class a lot and I learned
about American culture and will always think of it in a
different way now. You used good TV shows & movies which
people liked and were on the same wavelength as the students.
You are by far one of the best teachers I have had in my
3 years here. Job well done!"
- "I really enjoyed the course. When I first began,
I had no idea that it would be as fun and entertaining as
it has been. I feel that the use of media, such as The
Matrix. People vs. Larry Flint, Jerry [Springer], and
The Simpsons really caught my attention and kept me
interested."
- "One thing I want to say: I hate English classes.
I hate writing. I hate reading something because it is assigned,
and I hate discussing it afterwards. But, strangely enough,
this has been the best class I have ever taken."
English 1101/1102
- "Professor McCorkle was active in
getting the students to help lead discussion about the covered
material. He is also a nice guy and helped you out if you
needed help with any of the assignments given."
- "Professor McCorkle was excellent. I hada very good
time in his class. I would take him again for anything,
if he was going to be here. He made coming to English, a
class that seems rather superfluous at Tech, a good experience."
- "I learned a lot about a topic I've never really
thought about before and enjoyed learning in Mr. McCorkle's
class."
- "McCorkle did a great job of covering a sometimes
monotonous subject. He made class interesting. I've never
really been fond of a literature course on technology, but
this one was actually very informative. I learned a lot
about how technology really does touch every part of society.
McCorkle also helped improve my rhetoric skills. I'll probably
always remember ethos, pathos, and logos. The class discussion
included the whole class, and McCorkle did a great job adding
questions to make the whole class think. The online discussion
board also added to the environment of the classroom. The
class was very personal."
***
Ben McCorkle
2.15.2000
Assessment of Teaching Evaluations
At first, I wasn't sure how to approach my
teaching evaluations--how to make them useful to me in terms
of developing my pedagogy. As far as initial impressions
go, I found the evaluations to be hastily written, mostly
complimentary (but in a politesse sort of way), and lacking
in any real thoughtfulness or care. What real information
I could cull from these evaluations didn't seem detailed
or specific enough to offer any valuable insights; in short,
I didn't see any way to make use of them.
Then, per our FYWP directives, I began thinking
about these more and more, reflecting upon them and trying
to decipher the dense, evasive code of the freshman evaluator.
I began looking for commonalities among the group, and I
was pleased, though not surprised, to find that the coincidental
points confirmed my own notions regarding the class's content.
I knew, for instance, that they generally liked "Dumpster
Diving" far better than Sylvia Scribner's essay on
literacies; I knew as well that they generally liked most
of the in-class activities. Looking at these reaffirming
bits of information led me to adjust my syllabus accordingly.
Feeling like the Good Teacher, I was rather pleased with
myself that I had streamlined the course so as to better
fit the anticipated needs of my students. The pattings-on-the-back
commenced.
It was during our last peer mentor meeting,
the one that specifically addressed this assignment, that
my feelings of self satisfaction were unsettled. As Brenda
Boyle (WPA) reminded us, our students don't necessarily
arrive at their opinions uninfluenced (I say "reminded"
because Brenda raised an all-too-obvious point, only one
that I find too easy to stow in my Suitcase of Denial).
This caused me to reflect upon how I presented different
material to the class: Was I more enthusiastic talking about
Eighner than Scribner? I think I was; I tend to approach
more comfortable material with more energy, more coherence
of direction. Did I likewise stress our in-class activities?
Certainly--I wanted the students to bond, and bond quickly.
Did I place too little emphasis on the writing journal component
of the course? Perhaps, though I'm a bit puzzled on this
point because I thought the class would better appreciate
the informal nature of the journal, the way the writing
was supposed to be a launching point into our discussions
of the readings. Thinking of the evaluations in this manner
left me with no shortage of data to sort through, and even
now I'm beginning to see ways of adjusting my syllabus for
Spring Quarter.
What I finally came to realize is that in
the absence of any real criticism of my performance, I can
look at my students' evaluations as a kind of implicit critique.
I'm coming to a better understanding of an informal and
motto of mine that until recently, I fear I was only paying
lip service to: It's not necessarily the tools you have,
it's what you do with them.
|
