Category Archives: book review

Learning

Nilson, Linda B. The Graphic Syllabus and the Outcomes Map: Communicating your course. Jossey-Bass, 2007.

I just finished reading Nilson’s work advocating for including graphic representations of course outcomes and learning. Nilson’s goal with the chapters and examples included is to further support student learning by using multimedia graphics (text and image mostly) to represent the overall flow and knowledge foundation of courses, so students can develop correct foundational knowledge.

I read the book because I wanted to do more with my syllabus. I was an easy sell for the content of this book. BUT, I found the HUGE variety of possibilities overwhelming. Nilson spends chapters on learning theory and multimedia learning to support her point, chapters on finding gaps when visually representing the syllabus, but I felt I needed more on visual organization ideas to support content. The problem with what I want is that a book can’t answer that desire for all faculty everywhere. How a faculty member demonstrates the connections can be unique even when the content is fairly similar. The graphics represent personality in the course, uniqueness of the students at the institution, and the learning goals of the course.

So, here is my first attempt at graphically representing the connection in my Freshmen Composition syllabus in an effort to develop a deeper understanding of foundational knowledge of writing, and the connection the essays/assignments have to supporting student writing development (with disciplinary and work writing in their future). We’ll see how it goes 🙂

I started with a free Piktochart template (thanks Piktochart for awesome free basic templates). Then I built it up from there. I saved as an image to my syllabus, and as a stand alone image for students to reference.

ENGL 110 Learning Outcomes

What do you think?

Advertisements

Leave a comment

Filed under book review, pedagogy

Creativity and Play

Resnick, Mitchel. Lifelong Kindergarten: Cultivating Creativity through Projects, Passion, Peers, and Play. MIT Press, 2017.

I love to consider integration points for play in the course curriculum – these moments usually work best with projects, groups assignments, problem-based learning, and reflection. So I was wanted to like this book from the beginning, and I see a lot of cross-over with my pedagogical approach.

Overall, the book is fantastic. Resnick discusses the creative learning spiral (p. 11), and the 4 p’s (projects, passion, peers and play). These are important discussions and considerations for education and educational theory.

While I like the creative learning spiral (imagine, create, play, share, reflect, imagine…..) the applications within the text have a huge product focus – and it’s a project product not an essay. Writing is mentioned in off handed ways (on one occasion as if writing is just one thing like there is one way to write – which is odd from someone who published a fairly mainstream book through the MIT Press…..). The Creative Learning Spiral and approaches to projects, passion, peers and play would benefit from humanities thinking.

Every time I considered this idea – this would benefit from humanities thinking – I asked myself what do I mean by Humanities thinking. While the focus of a book review should be the book, I’m going to digress here because it’s a blog and I can (remember how I mentioned one way of writing issues?).

What this book really made me consider is what is humanities thinking, and how do I support that in composition courses through play?

So for now, I’ll begin with Humanities thinking.

I’m firmly in the rhetoric camp – when I am asked to define rhetoric I draw heavily from Craig R Smith’s definition in the final chapter of Rhetoric and Human Consciousness. Rhetoric is epistemic, ontological and axiological. Rhetoric is the way we think so that we know we’re thinking (ontological), rhetoric is the way we think through values and ideologies and culture (axiological), and rhetoric is how we teach and learn thinking and ideas (epistemic). We as listeners and communicators make meaning through rhetoric – which means meaning is always deeply entrenched in values and beliefs.

For Humanities thinking this often includes considering the human condition – the fundamental belief asks humanities thinkers to consider the human condition as they make meaning with various texts (texts broadly defined here).

So considering this and the creative learning spiral – where are the people in this spiral? I understand that humans, children, are the agents driving the idea, but what is it the creator needs to recognize about their learning, about what they know, to enter the creative learning spiral in the first place? How could recognizing the values and ideologies of our education, and of our noticing of creative thinking needs help us be more effective creative thinkers? How could writing about, reflecting on learning, discussing metacognition, improve our creative thinking?

I love the ideas in this book, and the stories of thinkers, educators, and children exploring, but I also see a need for more Humanities thinking. What do we know and why do we know? And how powerful could that recognition be to creating and creative thinking and play?

While I don’t mean for this to be a “long live the Humanities” post – I really appreciate how much this book helped me consider what I mean when I say “Humanities thinking”. I also highly recommend this book!

Leave a comment

Filed under book review

Critical Attention and Digital Tech

Selfe, C.L. (1999). Technology and Literacy: A story about the perils of not paying attention. College Composition and Communication, 50(3), 411-436.

I haven’t read Selfe’s call for critical attention, critical awareness of technology since grad school. I had forgotten how much I like this article. I want to talk about why I assigned it, and why so many of her suggestions continue to be necessary reminders.

First, I assigned this article in my Social Media grad class that meets tonight as an introduction to the field of Rhetoric and Composition, specifically digital writing and social media. Most of the students in our program study and teach literature – so before we jump into digital rhetoric and digital humanities texts I really want to discuss the foundational ideas about literacies and technologies that shape so many of our research questions and influence public discussions of technologies. I’ve read one too many “ban all phones because teens are depressed” articles recently that never ask – are teens more depressed now? Do these teens have an outlet for discussing their experiences, their depression? Do they have people to help them work through these ideas who destigmatize mental health, take them seriously, and work to help them feel comfortable and confident? In most cases, the depression (causation error – thank you rhetoric training) linked to facebook results in a call for banning phones and facebook. While I don’t want to extoll the virtues of facebook (or my favorite twitter), and I’m not just arguing for the need to include digital technologies, I really do believe that to address the issues teens face we need to critically question the values influencing the cause and effect issues in our logic.

What I love about Selfe’s call is her focus on literacies and values, and her lengthy discussions of how school curriculum, public funding, values, and politics all influence what is taught and where it is taught. The inclusion or not of technology is always political – and in either case unless students are using and critically examining, we’re doing a disservice to our students. I’ve also been reading Shipka’s Toward a Composition Made Whole where she draws attention to ALL. THE. THINGS that influence composing and a composing situation (lights, food, water, desk height, chair comfort, etc.). I want to discuss what Shipka’s call for paying attention to everything surrounding composing adds to Selfe’s call for critical awareness. Both are so important!

Second, I’ve also assigned the article to my undergrads. I want them to grapple with how we ask questions about critical awareness of technology in relation to writing and why writing. So often, students complete composition courses simply because they are ‘required’. We know that affects their mindset about the course (in some positive and some negative ways). My goal is to raise awareness of all the places they compose, and all the choices they subconsciously make when they compose.

I saw a link floating around facebook – a composition course with the theme of Master of None. While theme’d courses are a whole discussion themselves, as I read Selfe’s article and considered Shipka’s call for attention to contexts of writing I thought about all the episodes, all the jokes Aziz Ansari devotes to the amount of time he spends composing a message. We all get it – we all spend tons of time making these hard decisions, but it’s rare that we stop and consider that we’re making hard writing decisions. We notice the language choices, we pay attention to the audience and audience reception, the device and so many other things. But why do we know to write in those ways? I hope Selfe can help my undergrads ask these questions. The goal is to raise awareness of how they are better writes because of my course so they can start from a better place (transfer) in all their other classes.

With all these ideas floating around, I’m excited for my students to read and discuss this article!

 

Leave a comment

Filed under book review

Arguments Illustrated: A book review

An Illustrated Book of Bad Arguments by Ali Almossawi

At my previous institution I taught rhetorical theory courses at the undergraduate and graduate level. I’ve been missing out on teaching rhetorical theory – history of rhetoric – so when Amazon recommended An Illustrated Book of Bad Arguments I bought it.

I read the book in two ways:

  • the first was as a teacher of rhetoric – especially missing my rhetorical theory texts and assignments
  • the second was as a teacher of composition – especially freshmen composition that focuses on the need to teach critical thinking

As  a teacher of rhetoric, I prefer to read theory texts. The more detailed discussion, the inclusion of history that influenced the development of argument theory (thanks Smith even though I always struggle with parts of your book) helps me as a learner understand the historical context that influenced argument understanding and contemporary usage. From this perspective, I didn’t love the book. I wanted more academic description.

As a teacher of composition, I love the straight forward descriptions, the naming of argument, and the comic/illustration. I think this can help students break down the subconscious choices humans make as they communicate – and the fallacies we subconsciously use – to help them gain entry to critical thinking for application to academic arguments. This is usually the most complex discussion in composition – we are really ‘good’ communicators, and normally employ cultural conventions we don’t recognize we know (or recognize we use). This book makes a list of the more popular argument fallacies in contemporary society to help readers gain entry to the convention – to recognize the convention (with some nod to the historical foundations – enough for a freshmen comp course!)

I also think the illustration can help students understand the issues with their argument presentation. The struggle here will be providing this as feedback to students: “Here is this totally awesome book (https://bookofbadarguments.com/), look at page 12 and 13 (Appeal to irrelevant authority) to better contextualize the secondary sources”. Will that help students actually navigate and understand how to better develop their appeal? This is a complex struggle with student understanding of logic and bias. Dr P may say something earth shattering about the color pink, but physicists have more expertise in color than compositionists, is her authority on the color pink credible?

I liked this book. I want to use this as part of my feedback to students in composition courses, but I also miss my rhetorical theory courses. As I begin my work developing Fall curriculum I’m exploring ways of using the comic approach provided in this book to help students access writing feedback in meaningful ways!

Leave a comment

Filed under book review

Mindfulness in the Grad Classroom: A book review

The Mindfulness-Informed Educator: Building acceptance and psychological flexibility in Higher Education edited by Jennifer Block-Lerner and LeeAnn Cardaciotto

I just finished teaching a graduate course “The Teacher as Writer” in which we used ideas of mindfulness to support writing productively. I’ve been interested in this idea for a while, especially when freshmen enter the composition course convinced they are terrible writers, English is their worst subject. I want to know where those ideas originated – what they feel about writing that leads to these ideas. What I’ve (non-scientifically) discovered is this leads to epic amounts of writer’s block, papers written at the last minute, less transfer of composition learning to other situations. These (again non-scientific) findings are serious – students can gain so much from a freshmen composition course taught influenced by recent composition theory like Writing about Writing, Teaching for Transfer, Writing Across the Curriculum theories and all the amazing cross-over amongst these ideas.

After working through my own ideas of mindfulness, I chose this book to support ideas in a graduate level writing classroom. Can a whole group of educators (K-12 instructors and me) come to a strong place wit mindfulness? Since productively writing educators make better teachers, can mindfulness help us (educators) with our own writing to strengthen our teaching of writing?

The good news, according to all the great studies in this book – yes. Most surprising, even informal attention to mindfulness, attention to present moment awareness to reduce stress (to reduce test anxiety, writer’s block) can have significant positive results in students. Not just in studying and test performance, but in overall reductions in depression, anxiety, etc.

While this book mentions some techniques, it doesn’t offer well developed formal discussions of the techniques studied to produce these results. The focus here is to justify inclusion of mindfulness in higher education – so the focus on scientific studies makes tons of sense. As an educator looking for ideas to modify and support student writers – this book falls short.

If you’re looking for evidence that mindfulness training in higher education leads to significant positive results, this book is fantastic. The references to specific practices students liked, textbooks used in formal training (in university 101, or first year experience 101 seminars) are excellent. When I initially selected the book – I skimmed Part II (titled Mindfulness-and Acceptance-Based Approaches in the Training of Behavioral Health Professionals) and Part III (titled Application of Mindfulness- and Acceptance-Based Approaches in Higher Education: Special Populations and Contexts) understanding these sections to provide more detail on mindfulness in higher education – tips for implementing lessons in the classroom – lessons we could modify to suit our needs in our classrooms.

So I love that this book provided significant research findings on the benefit of these programs, I had just hoped it would have higher education ideas for implementing these programs.

Leave a comment

Filed under book review